CITE...godammit I said CITE!!!

In My Humble Opinion
1

How many times have we heard or read that?
It seems that often even when you do offer a source it is disparaged as being unreliable. I understand that completely. Although, there are those of us who question even the wisdom of Unca Cece… :frowning:

My question:

Are there any cites that one can offer as proof or a source that WE for the most part accept as valid and/or indisputable? I found this thread…
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=149223&page=2&pp=50
which offers several good resources. But the list was (I thought) not critical enough regarding the validity/reliability of the info. found in some of the links posted. I would probably include

to the list. To this one as well, maybe.

So, how about it? Besides Cecil (or even IF in some cases), what cites/sources would you accept as indisputable on a given subject? Are there any?

Sorry if this is a worn out subject. I did a search but all I got was the previously mentioned thread. Besides, I’m a bit nervous about doing searches anymore…damned if you do & damned if you don’t.

Thanks in advance, I plan to use this list whenever WE have a dispute. So make it a good one, 'cause I’m gonna cite you w/ your own source one of these days and I don’t wanna hear a bunch of whining about where I got it. :wink:

2

Good point, t-keela. This attitude is becoming prevalent in our society as well as on the internet. No one believes anyone nowadays. Just a sign of the times, I reckon. To be honest, I was recently called on a quote that I was using. I felt embarrassed and a little sheepish about attributing the quote to the wrong person, but (and here’s where I admit to being a bit of a dolt about the whole thing) I decided to look up the correction, and then I corrected the correction! Dang! So, I’m as guilty as anyone else on this topic…

3

The truly sad part of this is any internet site can have misinformation. Unlike the mainstream media, the internet doesn’t have the restraints imposed by rules against deception.
Its the price paid for the freedom we have on the 'net.
I am more likely to use cites from books… you remember books don’t you? those heavy thing we carried around in school. Well, maybe not. I’m old. so maybe I’m the only one who remembers them…
[sub]Wanders away muttering to her self[/sub]

4

Here’s an old thread on the subject:

5

ccw Yeah, that was a good thread. I enjoyed reading it. I can appreciate and understand the various opinions regarding the validity of sources. Obviously a website can be someone’s “source” and may be used when asked for a cite. Whether it is accepted as credible or not is another story.

Also obvious is that some sources are less credible than others. I mean if I cite JAMA as the source for a medical opinion, I assume most people would consider it good.

On the other hand, if I cite Bubba’s Bar & Grill personal webpage as a source, it may not be given the same respect.

I wasn’t really looking for a debate on whether or not webpages are credible or not. More so, which sources do you say, “Okay, that’s good…if (example) said that, then I’ll agree.” For example, if I claim that a neutrino DOES have mass. Then I cite, Stephen Hawking as the source of my claim and provide a site which details the science behind it. Would Hawking be a source that YOU would accept. Would it be convincing if you didn’t agree before?

I’ve read threads before where many folks claim they’ve NEVER changed their mind about something due to what they have read at the SDMB. To me that is a closed mind. Otherwise, they must be the ultimate source. Names people, give me names. Who are these “know it alls” that are never wrong?

(sorry, had a little rant in me I guess)

I ask because it seems no matter WHERE/WHAT/or WHO the source is. Eventually they are discredited for whatever reason. Of course one’s sources should be scrutinized. But surely, somebody somewhere is an authority/expert that can be considered valid, credible and reliable when quoted.

If I seem redundant, I apologize. I feel like maybe I didn’t make my point clear. Apparently no one has a source in which they are confident enough to list.

So, I guess from now on…it’s up to Unca Cece. But, he has left us to our own demise since last spring. He’s been here once…1 time since May of last year. Looks like ignorance finally won. We’ve got no reliable sources of information anymore AND our fearless leader is AWOL. That’d be desertion by now wouldn’t it?

I guess he’s not to blame. WE voted him into office, right? :wink:

hmm…Looks like this thread went to hell quick. I must be getting on more and more ignore lists everyday. :smiley:

6

I forgot to add…

BOOKS!! :eek:

I seem to recall some old fashioned means of communicating and recording data on flammable sheets of wood pulp. They were often collected and stacked in warehouses to be burned at a later date.

Damned tree-killers, heh. PuN U need to quit talkin to yourself, okay

I’ve got a rather substantial collection of these things myself (mostly read BTW).
and Radar You should be ashamed. :wink: not saying what though

OKAY, I’m done. It can die now.

7

From this thread:

Here’s what I came up with, as far as “cite legitimacy”.

We might have to establish a Site Validity Index for the WWW:

(10 - highest, 1 - lowest)

10 - (theoretically, none)
9 - Well respected sources of information (i.e. http://www.britannica.com)
8 - Well respected scientific or research organizations (i.e. http://www.perldoc.com)
7 - .gov sites
6 - .edu sites
5 - Well respected communities (i.e. http://www.dmoz.com)
4 - Well respected message boards (i.e. http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb)
3 - Respected commentators (i.e. http://www.nationalreview.com)
2 - News media sites
1 - Joe Blow sites

Am I even close with this hierarchy? What did I miss? What should be higher / lower?

I put news media sites so low because they tend to sensationalize headline stories, or add their own twists to the story, then when the dust clears, the REAL story finally emerges.

I put message boards like SDMB above respected commentators because on an open forum like SDMB someone can call your opinion BS (and prove it).

I’m sure I have over-simplified things, but this list is kind of a guideline I use.

Then there’s Snopes, don’t get me started in them hehe. Actually many of their conclusions are well-founded and well-supported, but some of their conclusions just seem to be “because I said so”. They are in the “respected commentator” class for me.